Antonia Castañeda has utilized scholarship from women’s studies and Me

The apparent contradiction is, in fact, explained before line 29.


This sentence says that elite Californians (i.e. "such women") were portrayed favorably by male, non-Hispanic novelists. Thus, the literary depiction of elite Californianas was favorable.

In contrast, this sentence implies that literary depictions of Mexicans, in general, were unflattering (and, thus, unfavorable), because such unflattering depictions were vital in rallying support for the M-A War.

So we have an apparent contradiction: in general, literary depictions of Mexicans were unflattering, but elite Californianas (Mexican women in California) were portrayed favorably. This is the contradiction described by choice (D) in the first question.
_________________

This is a tough passage! Thinking about RC strategy as a whole, the most important things are to avoid getting bogged down in the details and to focus on the structure of the passage. What does the author really want you to get out of a particular paragraph? And how does that paragraph fit in with the rest of the passage?

As an example, here is one way to think about paragraph #1 (which should shed some light on your points #1, 2, and 3):

• The author introduces the subject studied by Casteneda: "nineteenth-century literary portrayals of Mexican women"
• Some scholars make an observation about male novelists in the US as a whole: they "define women solely in their domestic roles of wife and mother."
• These scholars provide a reason for the observation above: "women's traditional economic role in home-based agriculture was threatened by the transition to a factory-based industrial economy"
• Casteneda notes a difference between Californianas and non-hispanic women: "California protected the economic position of "Californianas" by ensuring them property rights and inheritance rights equal to those of males."

Overall, the purpose of this paragraph is to introduce Casteneda's area of research (literary portrayals of Mexican women), and explain one of Casteneda's findings (the difference in economic status between Californianas and other American women).

If you're struggling to understand one particular piece of the passage (for example, the stuff about economic status), try to piece together the WHY author included that information. In this case, the author talks about economic status in order to explain how women are portrayed in literature -- male novelists only wrote about women in a wife or mother role because their economic role was threatened by the transition to industrialization. BUT, the economic role of Californianas was more protected than the economic role of other women! How does this impact the literary portrayal of Mexican women? You'll find the answer in the next paragraph.

By focusing on structure and purpose, you can pick apart a difficult passage and hone in on what the author really cares about.

I hope that helps!
_________________

Wow, a lot of digital ink has been spilled recently on Question 4. Interestingly enough, the question was dropped from both the 2019 and 2020 editions of the OG Verbal Review. Nevertheless, in the interest of helping willacethis, SanjaySrini, and NandishSS, as well as the community at large, here are my thoughts on this tricky question.


Okay, a primary purpose/main idea question should be pretty straightforward. One consideration in your approach to such questions is to justify the presence of each paragraph. That is, it is not good enough to choose an answer that summarizes a paragraph at the exclusion of another or, worse yet, focuses on a detail within a single part of the passage. So what is this passage about, both paragraphs considered? What is the authorial presence? Let us see what the answers have in store.


I typically put problematic parts of an answer choice in red font, but this one warrants more of a yellow-light, look-before-you-leap highlight. To be clear, I have no problem with trace historical influences, and the passage does, in fact, discuss how Mexican Americans were depicted in nineteenth-century literature. However, the first line of the passage makes it clear that Castañeda, through whose lens we view the content of the text, has peered into scholarship on the period to examine... portrayals of Mexican women. It is the women, not all Mexican Americans, who are the focus of the research. Although the second paragraph mentions unflattering depictions of Mexicans, the description only serves as a contrast to the more favorable portrayal of the Californianas--the Mexican women of the territory, as the group is defined at the end of paragraph one. Finally, this answer omits the keyword literary. The passage mentions literary depictions from beginning to end. To say that the primary purpose is to examine influences on the general depiction of any or all Mexican Americans of the time is an overstatement. I would not get rid of this answer choice right away, but I would explore other options that might place women in particular front and center.


Phew, this one is much easier to eliminate. To straighten the answer out, scholarship in women's studies is affecting research in history? Women's studies is mentioned as a discipline through which Castañeda has conducted research, but so, too, is history itself. Look at the first line of the passage again:

Antonia Castañeda has utilized scholarship from women's studies and Mexican-American history to examine nineteenth-century literary portrayals of Mexican women.

Women's studies and Mexican-American history are mentioned side by side, with no cause-and-effect relationship in sight. Keep moving.


This is a difficult one to make heads or tails of in a first pass. If a literary stereotype lies at the heart of the passage, then first, what is that stereotype, and second, do both paragraphs, or, in other words, does the entire passage, center on this idea? It takes a little detective work, but yes, the passage map is clear. The literary stereotype is not mentioned explicitly until the beginning of the second paragraph, conveniently with the word stereotypical preceding it—the story of an ambitious non-hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana. Aha, so the plot is the stereotype! Now the pieces start to fall into place. The first paragraph sets the stage, providing the historical information, while the second paragraph delves into the literature itself. The concluding line of the first paragraph tells us that although non-Hispanic women were being economically displaced by industrialization, their Mexican counterparts in territorial California, the "Californianas," were ensured property rights and inheritance rights equal to those of males. And now the stereotypical or patent plot makes sense: scheming men wanted to marry up to an elite social status, and marriage to Californianas was the vehicle through which that upward mobility could be achieved. A little Barry Lyndon-ish, right? If you were a little standoffish on your first read, I would understand. (I was, too.) But this is a qualified answer.


This is a fitting description of another passage, perhaps, but not the one in front of us, in which minority writers are not even mentioned. No, this passage focuses on the works of primarily male, non-Hispanic novelists of the nineteenth century. Another answer that is clearly incorrect.


About the only thing this answer choice is good for is that it shines more light on this notion that the passage concerns a literary stereotype. The scholarly debate is noticeably absent, however, with Castañeda serving as our only guide.

To sum up, between (A) and (C), (A) presents too much of a blanket statement. In a passage that starts and ends with a focus on women, it is too broad to say the primary purpose concerns the depiction of Mexican Americans in general. Meanwhile, choice (C) ties together the information from the two paragraphs of the passage in a manner that is hard to argue against, even if we usually think of a stereotype as a description of a type of person.

I hope that helps. I would love to know why GMAC™ decided to exclude the question from more recent editions of the Verbal Review. In any case, good luck, everyone, with your studies.

- Andrew
_________________

I just share my opinion, hope it may help somehow.
Paragraph 1: Castañeda finding
while on-Hispanic women being economically displaced by industrialization, Californianasthere was proteced by law.
Paragraph 2: implication of the law
the law helps explain desirous of marrying an elite Californianas over other: economic significance.

Q1: The “apparent contradiction” mentioned in line 29 refers to the discrepancy between the
A. legal status of Mexican women in territorial California and their status in the United States
B. unflattering depiction of Mexicans in novels and the actual public sentiment about the Mexican-American War
C. existence of many marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants and the strictures against them expressed in novels
D. literary depiction of elite Californianas and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals
E. novelistic portrayals of elite Californianas’ privileged lives and the actual circumstances of those lives

in the second paragraph, the law helps explain the contradiction between Californianas and the other: " Californianas were portrayed more favorably than were others of the same nationality." choice D does this

Q2: Which of the following could best serve as an example of the kind of fictional plot discussed by Antonia Castañeda?
A. A land speculator of English ancestry weds the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner after the speculator has migrated to California to seek his fortune.
B. A Californian woman of Hispanic ancestry finds that her agricultural livelihood is threatened when her husband is forced to seek work in a textile mill.
C. A Mexican rancher who loses his land as a result of the Mexican-American War migrates to the northern United States and marries an immigrant schoolteacher.
D. A wealthy Californiana whose father has bequeathed her all his property contends with avaricious relatives for her inheritance.
E. A poor married couple emigrate from French Canada and gradually become wealthy as merchants in territorial California.

in paragraph 2: "Because of their real-life economic significance, the Californianas were portrayed more favorably than were others of the
same nationality."
it clearly tells "economic significance", so choi A: seek fortune
A land speculator of English ancestry weds the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner after the speculator has migrated to California to seek his fortune

Q3:
Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for Castañeda’s explanation of the “stereotypical plot” mentioned in lines 18-19?
A. Non-Hispanic traders found business more profitable in California while it was a territory than when it became a state.
B. Very few marriages between Hispanic women and non-Hispanic men in nineteenth-century territorial California have actually been documented.
C. Records from the nineteenth century indicate that some large and valuable properties were owned by elite Californianas in their own right.
D. Unmarried non-Hispanic women in the nineteenth-century United States were sometimes able to control property in their own right.
E. Most of the property in nineteenth-century territorial California was controlled by Hispanic men.

According to the passage, stereotypical plot refers to the reason why the Californianas were portrayed more favorably than were others of the same nationality: economic significant.
- so if scholar found that Californianas were poor, it weakens the explaination.
-If studies found Californianas were rich, it supports the explaination. choice C does this.

generally, this paragraph is hard for me. very happy to see other opinions.

The “apparent contradiction” mentioned in line 29 refers to the discrepancy between the

A. legal status of Mexican women in territorial California and their status in the United States
B. unflattering depiction of Mexicans in novels and the actual public sentiment about the Mexican-American War
C. existence of many marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants and the strictures against them expressed in novels
D. literary depiction of elite Californianas and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals
E. novelistic portrayals of elite Californianas’ privileged lives and the actual circumstances of those lives


"The importance of economic alliances
forged through marriages with Californianas explains
this apparent contradiction. Because of their real-
(30) life economic significance, the Californianas were
portrayed more favorably than were others of the
same nationality."

I we read the above excerpt form the RC we can see that the apparent contradiction was the depiction of elite Californians and other Mexicans .
The paragraph is discussing the role played by elite Californians in getting support for American-Mexican war .

1. The “apparent contradiction” mentioned in line 29 refers to the discrepancy between the
D. literary depiction of elite Californians and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals - These novels’ favorable portrayal of such women
is noteworthy since Mexican-American historians have concluded that unflattering literary depictions of Mexicans were vital in rallying the United States public’s support for the Mexican-American War (1846–1848). The importance of economic alliances forged through marriages with Californianas explains this apparent contradiction.Because of their real-life economic significance, the Californians were portrayed more favorably than were others of the same nationality.


2 .Which of the following could best serve as an example of the kind of fictional plot discussed by Antonia Castañeda?
A. A land speculator of English ancestry weds the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner after the speculator has migrated to California to seek his fortune. - the story of an ambitious non-Hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana.


3. Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for Castañeda’s explanation of the “stereotypical plot” mentioned in lines 18-19?
For Castañeda, the laws explain a stereotypical plot created primarily by male, non-Hispanic novelists: the story of an ambitious non-Hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana.
A. Non-Hispanic traders found business more profitable in California while it was a territory than when it became a state. - Irrelevant
B. Very few marriages between Hispanic women and non-Hispanic men in nineteenth-century territorial California have actually been documented. - Irrelevant
C. Records from the nineteenth century indicate that some large and valuable properties were owned by elite Californianas in their own right. - Correct - strengthens the claim that Californiana was desired for economic reasons .
D. Unmarried non-Hispanic women in the nineteenth-century United States were sometimes able to control property in their own right. - Irrelevant - we are not concerned about entire United States
E. Most of the property in nineteenth-century territorial California was controlled by Hispanic men. - Weakener - This goes against the author's premise - Hispanic law in territorial
California protected the economic position of “Californianas” (the Mexican women of the territory) by ensuring them property rights and inheritance rights
equal to those of males.
Answer C
_________________

Hi faced difficulty in answering First Question itself ,I hope You can help here-

The below Sentence in the Paragraph is quite Confusing For me The importance of economic alliances forged through marriages with Californianas explains this apparent contradiction. The use of word "This " here , From my perspective if we have word this then that thing is already explained before not in the following sentence.

I spent my time in searching answer before this sentence but i was wrong. Please help.

Hi GMATNinja

In Question 1 --- why is C wrong ?

There were marriages

Also there were unflattering literary depictions of Mexicans for the support of the Mexican - USA war

Hence i chose C

Please let me know where is my logic wrong

P1 - AC women study; male author perception; hispanic women are doing better.
P2 - non-hispanic male marry hispanic lady. contrast. explanation.

(Book Question: 89)
The “ apparent contradiction” mentioned in line 29 refers to the discrepancy between the
Because of their real-life economic significance, the Californianas were portrayed more favourably than were others of the same nationality.
D. literary depiction of elite Californianas and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals -

----------------------------------------------
(Book Question: 90)
Which of the following could best serve as an example of the kind of fictional plot discussed by Antonia Castañeda?

the story of an ambitious non-hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana.

A. A land speculator of English ancestry weds the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner after the speculator has migrated to California to seek his fortune.
----------------------------------------------

(Book Question: 91)
Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for Castañeda’s explanation of the “stereotypical plot” mentioned in lines 18-19?
the story of an ambitious non-hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana.
PT - if some proof found on the same lines, - ambitious non-hispanic merchant, marrying an elite Californiana, economically it should be good.

A. Non-Hispanic traders found business more profitable in California while it was a territory than when it became a state. --- this can be a general argument.
B. Very few marriages between Hispanic women and non-Hispanic men in nineteenth-century territorial California have actually been documented. - far from anything.
C. Records from the nineteenth century indicate that some large and valuable properties were owned by elite Californianas in their own right.- on the lines of PT.
D. Unmarried non-Hispanic women in the nineteenth-century United States were sometimes able to control property in their own right. - hispanic women is focus.
E. Most of the property in nineteenth-century territorial California was controlled by Hispanic men. - non-hispanic is focus.

Official Answers and Explanations

1. The “apparent contradiction” mentioned in line 29 refers to the discrepancy between the
A. legal status of Mexican women in territorial California and their status in the United States
B. unflattering depiction of Mexicans in novels and the actual public sentiment about the Mexican-American War
C. existence of many marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants and the strictures against them expressed in novels
D. literary depiction of elite Californianas and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals
E. novelistic portrayals of elite Californianas’ privileged lives and the actual circumstances of those lives
Supporting idea
The apparent contradiction in line 29 refers to the difference, noted in the previous sentence, between favorable literary portrayals of elite Californianas— that is, Mexican women of the California territory—on the one hand and novels’ generally unflattering depictions of Mexicans on the other.
A. The passage discusses the difference between the legal rights of Mexican women in the California territory and those of non-Hispanic women. The legal rights of Mexican women outside territorial California are not mentioned.
B. The passage suggests that there is no contradiction between unflattering depictions of Mexicans in novels and public sentiment about the MexicanAmerican War: such depictions of Mexicans served to stir up sentiment in support of the war.
C. According to the passage, novels expressed no strictures against marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants. Instead, the novels portrayed such marriages favorably.
D. Correct. Non-Hispanic novelists glorified elite Californianas based on the importance of forging economic alliances with them, whereas novelists depicted other Mexicans in unflattering terms.
E. The passage indicates that elite Californianas’ lives were in fact privileged, at least in comparison to those of non-Hispanic women. It does not suggest that there was any contradiction between elite Californianas’ lives and how those lives were portrayed in novels.
The correct answer is D.

2. Which of the following could best serve as an example of the kind of fictional plot discussed by Antonia Castañeda?
A. A land speculator of English ancestry weds the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner after the speculator has migrated to California to seek his fortune.
B. A Californian woman of Hispanic ancestry finds that her agricultural livelihood is threatened when her husband is forced to seek work in a textile mill.
C. A Mexican rancher who loses his land as a result of the Mexican-American War migrates to the northern United States and marries an immigrant schoolteacher.
D. A wealthy Californiana whose father has bequeathed her all his property contends with avaricious relatives for her inheritance.
E. A poor married couple emigrate from French Canada and gradually become wealthy as merchants in territorial California.
Application
According to the passage, Castañeda focuses on a particular plot in which an elite Californiana is pursued by a non-Hispanic merchant or trader for the purpose of gaining economic advantage.
A. Correct. The story of a non-Hispanic land speculator wedding a Californiana who is likely, based on the inheritance rights granted her by the Hispanic law in territorial California, to inherit her father’s vineyard would precisely fit the plot that Castañeda discusses.
B. This description fails to identify the ethnicity of the Californiana’s husbandand the reason he married her, so there is no way to determine whether the story would fit Castañeda’s plot.
C. Castañeda’s plot involves a non-Hispanic male protagonist, so a Mexican rancher could not play the main male role in such a story.
D. The presence of a wealthy Californiana who inherits property might make this story seem to be an example of the fictional plot that Castañeda discusses, but there is no mention of a non-Hispanic merchant or trader who seeks her hand in marriage.
E. Simply taking place in territorial California would not make a story an appropriate example of the plot discussed by Castañeda.
The correct answer is A.

3. Which of the following, if true, would provide the most support for Castañeda’s explanation of the “stereotypical plot” mentioned in the lines 18–19?
A. Non-Hispanic traders found business more profitable in California while it was a territory than when it became a state.
B. Very few marriages between Hispanic women and non-Hispanic men in nineteenth-century territorial California have actually been documented.
C. Records from the nineteenth century indicate that some large and valuable properties were owned by elite Californianas in their own right.
D. Unmarried non-Hispanic women in the nineteenth-century United States were sometimes able to control property in their own right.
E. Most of the property in nineteenth-century territorial California was controlled by Hispanic men.
Evaluation
Castañeda explains the stereotypical plot of a non-Hispanic merchant seeking to marry an elite Californiana based on economics: these women had property and inheritance rights equal to men. Novelists based their plots on the women’s reallife economic power, which resulted in men’s wishing to build economic alliances with them. Supporting this explanation requires supporting these economic ideas in some way.
A. The profitability of non-Hispanic traders’ business is not an issue in Castañeda’s explanation; thus the change described has no significant relevance to that explanation.
B. The lack of the type of documentation described, rather than providing support for Castañeda’s explanation, signifies a deficit in documentary support for that explanation.
C. Correct. If elite Californianas did in fact own valuable properties,Castañeda’s economic explanation gains force. The women did have the real economic significance upon which Castañeda suggests the novelists drew.
D. If it were true that some non-Hispanic women controlled property in this way, Castañeda’s explanation of Californianas’ uniqueness would be somewhat undermined.
E. If most of the property in nineteenth-century territorial California was controlled by Hispanic men, that suggests that Californianas were less likely to possess the kind of economic power described in Castañeda’s argument.
_________________

Could someone help to explain what role the phrase 'stereotypical plot' plays? Didn't really understand. Hence, was unable to decide which option to choose for question 2? Please advise. thanks

According to the passage, Antonia Castañeda examined the portrayal of Mexican women in works of literature from the 19th century. Some of these works followed a "stereotypical plot." In other words, a bunch of novels form this time period all had the same story line.

The passage describes this stereotypical plot as "the story of an ambitious non-hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana." An example of this plot is found in answer choice (A):

Here, the "land speculator of English ancestry" corresponds to the "ambitious non-hispanic merchant or trader." This guy migrates to California and weds "the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner," who corresponds to the "elite Californiana" mentioned in the passage.

I hope that helps!
_________________

In Question 1 how do you eliminate C and choose D.
Because the marriages did exist and that could also be considered as a contradiction to the literary depiction.

Question #1 asks about the "apparent contradiction" in line 29 of the passage.

Let's first look at the exact wording of (C):

"Strictures" in this context means criticisms or condemnations. So, according to (C), the novels discussed in the passage criticize marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants. The passage just does not support this view -- Californianas are portrayed in a favorable light, and nothing suggests that their marriages are condemned in any way. If anything, novels following the "stereotypical plot" mentioned in the passage support these kind of marriages due to "their real-life economic significance." Because the information in (C) is not supported by the passage, (C) is out.

To find evidence about the "apparent contradiction" referenced in question #1, look at this sentence from the second paragraph:

The contradiction is that while most Mexicans were depicted in an "unflattering" way, Californianas were given a "favourable portrayal."

Take a look at (D):

This gives an accurate summary of the "apparent contradiction" in the passage -- Californianas were portrayed in a positive light, while other Mexicans were portrayed in a negative light. (D) is the correct answer to question #1.

I hope that helps!
_________________

The passage talks about the "Californianas (Mexican women in California)", the option A, talks about a Mexican women, we dont have enough information on whether she is a Californiana or not. Hence, we cannot use this as an example for author's fictional plot.

Can anyone help me understand, if I missed something here?

Thanks !
Shivam

Because (A) specifies that the land speculator marries the daughter of a Mexican vineyard owner "after the speculator has migrated to California," we can infer that the woman is likely a Californiana.

Remember, the question asks which answer choice "could best serve as an example" of the stereotypical plot -- which is different than asking which option is absolutely a novel with such a plot. The other answer choices clearly do NOT follow the stereotypical plot, so even with the slight doubt over whether the daughter in (A) is a Californiana, (A) is still the best choice.

I hope that helps!
_________________

dear experts,
from the first sentence of P2,

The law explain a stereotypical plot, not Casta??eda.


From this sentence, Casta??eda finds the law protected the economic position of Californianas, he did not explain stereotypical plot, right?

I actually have no idea how to lcate the question.
Please clarify.

Thanks in advance.

the sentences are complex and the ideas are complex but the text contain no hard new words. so, dont study for new words. it is not problem. focus on understanding the complex pattern and complex ideas. this require slow reading . dont read fast as gmat cheat us to do so.

practice reading slowly a few complex sentences one hour perday. read just 3 or 5 sentences of hard ideas. the economist magazine is good. dont read a lot of text without full understanding.

Dear GMATNinja,

To be honest, this is one of the more challenging RC that I've done because there are so many plot twists/subtleties in the paragraph that require me to re-read to finally grasp them. I still have a few things I'd like to clear up that I could not find anywhere on Google:

1. What does the author mean by "economically displaced by industrialization"? Does that mean these women's wealth are being diminished because of industrialization? i.e. Usually these women would be selling milk or some agricultural products but because of industrialization, customers don't buy from them anymore and buy from big corps, making these women poor?

2. Economic position - what does it mean? Does it mean the level of wealth/ how much money these women have?

3. This sentence "Castañeda finds that during the same period that saw non-Hispanic women being economically displaced by industrialization, Hispanic law in territorial California protected the economic position of "Californianas" (the Mexican women of the territory) by ensuring them property rights and inheritance rights equal to those of males." basically means that these Hispanic law-maker, seeing how non-Hispanic women are getting so poor because of this industrialization trend, decided to have an upper hand and quickly wrote laws to protect their Hispanic women before industrialization finally caught up with them? Is that correct?

4. This apparent contradiction (that people have talked so much about in this thread) "The importance of economic alliances forged through marriages with Californianas explains this apparent contradiction ." basically means: Hispanic women were described favorably not because the U.S. don't care about supporting their troops during the war anymore - they STILL support the war. They're only being nice to these women for their economic gains since such "economic alliances forged through marriages" is important to them? (that's not very nice in my opinion but whatever). Did I interpret it correctly?

Thank you!